NCJ Number
44087
Journal
Hastings Constitutional Law Quarterly Volume: 4 Issue: 2 Dated: (SPRING 1977) Pages: 219-247
Date Published
1977
Length
29 pages
Annotation
THE STATUS OF PRISONERS' CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS ACCORDING TO THE PRACTICE AND THEORY OF THE U.S. SUPREME COURT IS ASSESSED IN A CRITICAL REVIEW OF RELEVANT SUPREME COURT DECISIONS AND ANALYTICAL METHODS.
Abstract
A BRIEF HISTORY OF THE SUPREME COURT'S HANDLING OF PRISONERS' RIGHTS CASES IS PRESENTED. A REVIEW OF MORE RECENT SUPREME COURT DECISIONS AND OF THE ANALYTICAL METHODS EMPLOYED BY THE COURT IN REACHING THE DECISIONS TOUCHES ON THE COURT'S AVOIDANCE OF SUBSTANTIVE CONSTITUTIONAL ISSUES, TREATMENT OF THE DUE PROCESS CLAUSE OF THE FOURTEENTH AMENDMENT, CONSIDERATION OF FIRST AND EIGHTH AMENDMENT PROVISIONS, AND REFERENCE TO INMATES' RIGHT OF ACCESS TO THE COURTS. IT IS CONCLUDED THAT THE ANALYTICAL METHOD EMPLOYED BY THE COURT IN RESOLVING PRISONERS' RIGHTS CASES IS INCONSISTENT WITH THE COURT'S STATED PROPOSITION THAT THE CONSTITUTION PROTECTS PRISONERS. IT IS ARGUED THAT THE COURT'S DEFERENCE TO PRISON OFFICIALS, PARTICULARLY IN THE DELEGATION OF DISCRETIONARY CUSTODIAL DECISIONMAKING TO WARDENS, RESULTS IN A 'HANDS-OFF' APPROACH TO JUDICIAL REVIEW OF PRISONER COMPLAINTS. THE COURT IS URGED TO ARTICULATE A CONSISTENT FRAMEWORK FOR ITS ANALYSIS OF PRISONERS' RIGHTS, EITHER MINIMIZING DEFERENCE TO PRISON OFFICIALS OR ACKNOWLEDGING AND JUSTIFYING THE POSITION THAT THE CONSTITUTION IS INAPPLICABLE TO PRISONERS. (AUTHOR ABSTRACT MODIFIED).